Noam Chomsky is Professor of Linguistics at MIT and a world-renowned political thinker and activist. The author of numerous books, including On Language and Understanding Power (both available from The New Press), he lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Michel Foucault (1926-84) held a chair in the History of Systems of Thought at the Collège de France. The New Press has published three previous volumes of his work as well as a collection, The Essential Foucault.
John Rajchman is a professor of philosophy at Columbia University and author of Michel Foucault. He lives in New York City.
Two of the twentieth century's most influential thinkers debate a perennial question.
In 1971, at the height of the Vietnam War and at a time of great political and social instability, two of the world's leading intellectuals, Noam Chomsky and Michel Foucault, were invited by Dutch philosopher Fons Edlers to debate an age-old question: is there such a thing as "innate" human nature independent of our experiences and external influences?
The resulting dialogue is one of the most original, provocative, and spontaneous exchanges to have occurred between contemporary philosophers, and above all serves as a concise introduction to their basic theories. What begins as a philosophical argument rooted in linguistics (Chomsky) and the theory of knowledge (Foucault), soon evolves into a broader discussion encompassing a wide range of topics, from science, history, and behaviorism to creativity, freedom, and the struggle for justice in the realm of politics.
In addition to the debate itself, this volume features a newly written introduction by noted Foucault scholar John Rajchman and includes additional text by Noam Chomsky.
莫尤 【早些时候用小号写过的一篇书评,偶然看到,纳闷怎么这么眼熟。。。。】 此书是1971年乔姆斯基与福柯论辩的产物,根据访谈者方斯.厄尔德斯的描述,“两位大师的外貌和内心大相径庭”,这恐怕是读后最粗浅的印象之一,乔姆斯基温婉而客气地滔...
評分读这个对话录,内容倒先不讲。我起码觉得上得了台面的人辩证思维能力要发展得很好。两个人交流观点,其实是在补充同一个命题的不同方面,首先得有这种概念,并不是“你对我错”这种对立式的搏杀。人当然有主观倾向,prefer to 完全可以理解,都是情结在作怪。重要的是不是所有...
評分七十年代早期的时候,荷兰的一家公共电视台曾经做过一系列的知识分子对谈的电视节目,邀请有时候是意见相近,有时候观点完全相左的著名知识分子就一个固定的论题展开讨论。本书所记录的乔姆斯基和福科的讨论正是这一些列访谈节目中的一期,时间是1971年。 乔姆斯基那时候正是...
評分读这个对话录,内容倒先不讲。我起码觉得上得了台面的人辩证思维能力要发展得很好。两个人交流观点,其实是在补充同一个命题的不同方面,首先得有这种概念,并不是“你对我错”这种对立式的搏杀。人当然有主观倾向,prefer to 完全可以理解,都是情结在作怪。重要的是不是所有...
評分莫尤 【早些时候用小号写过的一篇书评,偶然看到,纳闷怎么这么眼熟。。。。】 此书是1971年乔姆斯基与福柯论辩的产物,根据访谈者方斯.厄尔德斯的描述,“两位大师的外貌和内心大相径庭”,这恐怕是读后最粗浅的印象之一,乔姆斯基温婉而客气地滔...
20世紀前半葉結構語言學成為顯學 喬姆斯基以其為靶子 而當結構主義擴散後 福柯以之為武器批判科技史中的主觀導嚮。所以二人都是對的 人類現象就是充滿綫索而又無法預測
评分從這本書37頁最後一段“let's begin by referring to something that we have already discussed …”開始,對照著網上的視頻看
评分這兩個人,相當的萌啊。還有Said,你是不是Foucault的Fan啊~~= =||||
评分喬姆斯基:人性.. 福柯:沒有人性。 C:要去中心化 .. F:醒醒吧沒有人性這種東西。C:要戰鬥 .. F:但是你知道並沒有人性 C:為瞭公義 .. F:不可能的因為沒有人性 ..
评分著名的“世紀辯論”實在是齣人意料的溫和。喬姆斯基的思路還是唯理主義那一套,福柯的思路倒是很結構主義。倒也沒有誰完勝誰,一個人完全可以在理解福柯的懷疑主義的情況下欣賞喬姆斯基的行動意誌。
本站所有內容均為互聯網搜索引擎提供的公開搜索信息,本站不存儲任何數據與內容,任何內容與數據均與本站無關,如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美書屋 版权所有