>
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > What are the debate terms between Foucault and Chomsky? I caught a
> > fragment of this debate in the video titled after Chomsky's book
> > "Manufacturing of Consent." Thank you. A. Deshevoi
> >
> > .
>
> In the most obvious terms, language serves as the center of the debate between
> Foucault and Chomsky. Yet, even with that common "ground" the interesting
> aspect of the exchange is how little it constituted a "debate" at all. Miller
> (in his Bio. of Foucualt) has some great quotes from Chomsky responding to the
> debate. Chomsky was nonplussed to say the least; he simply could not believe
> the things that came out of Foucault's mouth. Everything that Chomsky assumed
> to be a matter of simple common-sense agreement turned out to be directly
> contradicted by Foucault. That's a bit of a superficial response to your
> question, but my scant knowledge of Chomsky would only lead to an unjust summary
> of the substantive terms of the exchange...
>
> Sam Chambers
>
>
There is one published interview of Foucault and Chomsky together but I
cannot remember the details. sorry. What i read was that Chomsky believed
in the innateness of language and language being essential and universal
to human beings and foucault questioned the idea of universality of
language and ths subverted the idea of deep strucutres in Chomskian
transformational generative grammar. For Foucault the idea of
deep/surface structures appeared as a discursive practice and human
nature was simply unacceptable. That is what I remember of this
interview. no idea of any publishing details. sorry
saeed
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > What are the debate terms between Foucault and Chomsky? I caught a
> > fragment of this debate in the video titled after Chomsky's book
> > "Manufacturing of Consent." Thank you. A. Deshevoi
> >
> > .
>
> In the most obvious terms, language serves as the center of the debate between
> Foucault and Chomsky. Yet, even with that common "ground" the interesting
> aspect of the exchange is how little it constituted a "debate" at all. Miller
> (in his Bio. of Foucualt) has some great quotes from Chomsky responding to the
> debate. Chomsky was nonplussed to say the least; he simply could not believe
> the things that came out of Foucault's mouth. Everything that Chomsky assumed
> to be a matter of simple common-sense agreement turned out to be directly
> contradicted by Foucault. That's a bit of a superficial response to your
> question, but my scant knowledge of Chomsky would only lead to an unjust summary
> of the substantive terms of the exchange...
>
> Sam Chambers
>
>
There is one published interview of Foucault and Chomsky together but I
cannot remember the details. sorry. What i read was that Chomsky believed
in the innateness of language and language being essential and universal
to human beings and foucault questioned the idea of universality of
language and ths subverted the idea of deep strucutres in Chomskian
transformational generative grammar. For Foucault the idea of
deep/surface structures appeared as a discursive practice and human
nature was simply unacceptable. That is what I remember of this
interview. no idea of any publishing details. sorry
saeed