Re: Foucault vs. Chomsky

Omar Nasim wrote,
> Yes I would have to agree with your analysis of each's
> epistemological and ontological positions. But would you say that
> Chomsky is a structuralist, in that he makes truth and molds reality,
> while Foucualt is a post-structuralist ( I think he even called himself
> one). If this is true, then we find that there is some sort of implicit
> tension between Foucualts works and Chomsky's. Another question I have
> is that, Is Chomsky a post-modernist like Foucault???

I must admit that I am too much of a novice in post-modern philosophy
to feel very comfertable making these judgements. Sorry. My general
impression would be to say that Chomsky has more in common with
Aristotilian philosophy than the post-modern variety. He's very big
into classical catagories and innate ideas/structures. This doesn't
strike me as being particularly post-modern, but as I've said, I'm
somewhat a novice in these fields. (most my training is in analytic
philosophy, especialy Russel and Wittgenstein, who Chomsky dissagreed
with on most everything).
M. Lister
philosophy Student
Boise State University

Partial thread listing: