draiocht23 wrote:

Sorry to hear that. Don't know much about Carol, but her husband's a genius.

Her husband has engaged in a reign of academic terror to get his narrow [mod]please consult the rules on posting in the MN Charter[/mod] view across. In that he has mimiced the authoritarian regimes he excoriates

see for example "The Search for Mind" (1995, 200, 2003), Chapter 3

Cut the maudlin bull. There was no comment on Carol chomsky whatsoever in my posting, nor is there on this one.

"search for Mind" (2003) indeed attacks Noam chomsky on p. 114- and don't worry, he won't sue as it is non-libellous very mild compared to what he did and does himself

From Pp 101-148 there is a discussion of linguistics contextualising the work. "search for Mind" in google gets a total of 127,ooo hits, of which the top 6 and 8 of the top 10 are for the book

It doesn't need Chomsky. Nice try, though.......

Hermes wrote:

I've just seen this.

If you type

Quote :

chomsky "The Search for Mind"

into Google, this thread tops the list of results.

I've no clue as to whether these allegations are true or not, but I seriously doubt it. Erigena has done a hit and run attack and has provided no substantiation whatsoever for his allegations, not that an obituary is the right place for such an attack anyway.

Noam isn't the type of guy to be launching a suit for defamation, particularly on a site like this, where there is very decent debate to be had. But that doesn't make this right. I suggest that Erigena's slur be removed and he be asked to put it in a new thread with whatever passes for evidence in his mind, where it might be properly dealt with, should it merit it.

It's devastating to lose a wife. It's a sadness for the whole of humanity to lose a brilliance like Carol. This belittles a very decent man and his family's grief and angers those of us who value Carol's many and varied gifts to humanity.

These posts have been split from a thread on Carol Chomsky.

http://cogprints.org/653/00/RECENS.HTM

I believe this is the book referred to in the OP.

Erigena wrote:

Cut the maudlin bull. There was no comment on Carol chomsky whatsoever in my posting, nor is there on this one.

"search
for Mind" (2003) indeed attacks Noam chomsky on p. 114- and don't
worry, he won't sue as it is non-libellous very mild compared to what
he did and does himself

From Pp 101-148 there is a discussion of
linguistics contextualising the work. "search for Mind" in google gets
a total of 127,ooo hits, of which the top 6 and 8 of the top 10 are for
the book

It doesn't need Chomsky. Nice try, though.......

Who cares what "Search for Mind" has to say, it seems to have been written by some self absorbed arsehole eons ago. And if it had taken anything from Chomsky's credibility, the author would possibly have made a name for himself - which he didn't. Some attack... The literary equivalent of turning up to a battle of wits unarmed. Only in this case, the attacker was so insignificant, the attackee and the rest of the planet didn't even note his existence. Anyhow, enough about the book, it hardly merits discussion.

Besides that, you have yet to substantiate your mewling on about Chomsky. Pointing to a book's existence doesn't do this, it doesn't even explain your slur on Chomsky, (mod - cf).

Your point about not having referred to Carol Chomsky, in your muck, seems to have confused nobody but yourself. It was a thread about Dr. Carol Chomsky, who has just died, and not some playpen for you to be tossing your rattle around in.