In this essay I unpack Chomsky’s conception of human nature in the context of two famous debates. The first is a 1971 televised debate with Michel Foucault in which we can observe the post-structuralist mistrust of essentialist claims. The second is Chomsky’s debate with the empiricist and behaviourist W.V.O. Quine.
Following from last week, we begin by considering the young Blair’s early development. I want to expose how he ineffectually attempted…
A series of weekly essays charting George Orwell’s ideological evolution. Part one.
Where the previous essay examined Chomsky’s ontological claims regarding human nature, this essay seeks to show what underpins the normative claims he generates from this understanding. I first identify how the structural nature of Western societies is corrosive to human nature by examining Chomsky’s views on the institutions he has written most prolifically on: the state and the media.
If twenty jumbo jets crashed in a single day, social uproar would ensue. Yet the same number of children – six thousand – die every day due to water-related diseases as a result of inadequate sanitation (Lester 2007: 21). A plane crash is a visceral, disturbingly violent and terrifying death, but also exceedingly uncommon. The latter is a normalised out of sight, out of mind anaesthetised affair for most Western citizens.