I may be displaying my own ignorance about Chomsky, but I have to ask: why is a linguistics professor even remotely qualified to talk about fossil fuels, economics or social policy? Linguist friends have told me that he’s made plenty of mistakes even without his actual field of study, so I have to sincerely question Chomsky’s ability to comment on unrelated subjects with much authority.

What doesn’t give him authority to talk about fossil fuels? So I guess if you’re a biology major you can’t talk about politics and if you’re a poli sci major you can’t discuss evolution. Human beings are independent thinkers, free to speculate and discuss whatever they want.

And to add to my last comment, it has been “authorities” that have ruined our economic system—Geithner, Bernanke. It has been “authorities”—the FDA—that have told us certain drugs wouldn’t harm us (remember Fen-phen?), and it has been “authorities” that have told us there is nothing to worry about in the Gulf oil spill (even though 40 new carcinogens have been found).

Chomsky’s authority to speak about lingustics and cognitive sciences is not an issue. His mistakes in the field are known due to his many decades of prodigious participation in the field as a leading theorist and instructor. His authority to speak about the impact of fossil fuels is the same as any informed citizen- who has spent the last five decades as a full profressor at MIT, in constant discussion/debate/dialogue with leading scientists and mathematicians in many different fields from countries around the world. As for his authority to discuss social policy: he has none- which is the same as anybody else. There are no discipline-specific qualifications for social policy: none that aren’t available to anyone else willing to read, research, think critically, know how to ask questions, etc.

Chomsky is god to left-liberals. Millions of Left-Liberals chant “Chomsky is greatest intellectual Alive”…and they do it daily.

It does not matter if he is in reality an idiot who speaks on all subjects according to how his followers inform him. He has zero knowledge gained from direct experience; but he comments as long as his satelites such as Arundhati feed him some story.

Read more …

First of all, Chomsky’s work in linguistics was revolutionary. E.g., in one 30 pg., article he overturned Behaviorism that dominated the field of both linguistics and psychology for about 40 years. As for his political views, he is most articulate in foreign policy, sought after throughout the world, even if in the US (for political reasons) his brilliance is hardly acknowledged. If you would recognize, as do over 90% of climatologists that global warming is anthropogenic, you would see the connection to his political views. I suggest reading a bit beyond what your told to read.