# Noam Chomsky and Sam Harris **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [May 3, 2015, 8:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144 "2015-05-03T08:27:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![mr.jp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/48db29/32.png) [@mr.jp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mr.jp)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 8:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/1 "2015-05-03T08:27:02Z")
Noam Chomsky and Sam Harris had an email exchange which Sam Harris published on his blog. [http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-limits-of-discourse](http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-limits-of-discourse) If I google it, I get a lot of results praising Chomsky and saying he won the debate. To me, Chomsky seems to behave rather ill-mannered. Is this really the manner of discourse people prefer? ---
**Author:** ![scoots](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b77776/32.png) [@scoots](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scoots)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/2 "2015-05-03T10:08:18Z")
I don’t think Sam Harris comes off too well in that. Chomsky comes across as a bit grouchy but then he’s _always_ grouchy. I don’t think I’ve ever seen him be anything else. I’ve never seen him laugh or even smile. It’s actually quite amusing the way Harris seems to be expecting some kind of polite, dinner jacket, university debating society type of exchange. Sam Harris has clearly never watched Chomsky be interviewed. He invites Chomsky into a debate which Chomsky doesn’t particularly want in the first place but gamely plays along with and then spends most of the debate whining about how rude Chomsky is and how he was expecting a “collegiate” exchange of views. If I was involved in an email debate with Chomsky I would be expecting him to be abrasive. I would just overlook that and try to deal with his actual arguments. It seems like Sam Harris was unable to get past that. ---
**Author:** ![Weedy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/weedy/32/301_2.png) [@Weedy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weedy)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/3 "2015-05-03T12:53:57Z")
Chomsky is a terror, and that makes him hard to debate with. I don’t know anything about Sam Harris, but if he wanted a friendly discussion, he picked the wrong guy to argue with. For me personally, Chomsky’s abrasiveness means I ignore and discount most of his arguments. He is just not worth it. But I wouldn’t defend that as an intellectually rigorous approach. ---
**Author:** ![Maserschmidt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/maserschmidt/32/18829_2.png) [@Maserschmidt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maserschmidt)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/4 "2015-05-03T13:21:57Z")
That was entertaining, thanks. I don’t know who Sam Harris is, but he starts off whiny from the beginning and it only gets worse…he seems to spend more time arguing Chomsky’s presentation of the topics than he does their actual content. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/5 "2015-05-03T13:34:45Z")
I pretty much agree with everything in this video. He kind of criticizes both but doesn’t really condemn either person and states that he likes both Harris and Chomsky: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yXYqKSv6Ko](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yXYqKSv6Ko) ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/6 "2015-05-03T13:39:09Z")
> [@Maserschmidt](#): > > That was entertaining, thanks. I don’t know who Sam Harris is, but he starts off whiny from the beginning and it only gets worse…he seems to spend more time arguing Chomsky’s presentation of the topics than he does their actual content. Harris is an Atheist author/lecturer ---
**Author:** ![hogarth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hogarth/32/1773_2.png) [@hogarth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hogarth)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/7 "2015-05-03T15:27:13Z")
> [@mr.jp](#): > > To me, Chomsky seems to behave rather ill-mannered. Is this really the manner of discourse people prefer? The problem is that Mr. Chomsky has written extensively on his views (whether they’re stupid or brilliant, I don’t presume to judge), so I can see how it’s annoying to have person #1,238,972 come along and ask “Can you summarize your views to me so that I can have an easier time countering them?” On the other hand, I don’t think stonewalling qualifies as winning a debate. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/8 "2015-05-03T15:31:46Z")
> [@hogarth](#): > > The problem is that Mr. Chomsky has written extensively on his views (whether they’re stupid or brilliant, I don’t presume to judge), so I can see how it’s annoying to have person #1,238,972 come along and ask “Can you summarize your views to me so that I can have an easier time countering them?” For the average person of average intelligence maybe, but he should welcome debate with someone of the Intellectual caliber of Harris. They both, after all, make their living as authors and lecturers. ---
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/9 "2015-05-03T16:23:09Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > For the average person of average intelligence maybe, but he should welcome debate with someone of the Intellectual caliber of Harris. They both, after all, make their living as authors and lecturers. Sam Harris didn’t seem interested in having a debate at all. I’m not quite sure what he intended with this, but to me he came of as less interested in an honest debate than, Chomsky, who explicitly stated he’s not interested in having a debate with Harris. Atleast Chomsky argued and defended his views, right or wrong, rude or polite. Also, I have to add that I found Harris’ “thought experiment” cringe worthy, and Chomsky had every right to call it embarrasing. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/10 "2015-05-03T16:24:04Z")
Chomsky eventually won me over to the idea that Clinton is a war criminal, but Jesus, why does he have to be such a dick, pretty much all the time about everything. ---
**Author:** ![hogarth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hogarth/32/1773_2.png) [@hogarth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hogarth)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/11 "2015-05-03T16:35:10Z")
> [@Plumpudding](#): > > Also, I have to add that I found Harris’ “thought experiment” cringe worthy, and Chomsky had every right to call it embarrassing. Equally cringe-worthy was the suggestion that “If you’re defending Clinton, you must be defending Hitler!! Or maybe just Tojo.” EDIT: I think they both graduated from the [Birch Barlow school of debating](https://youtu.be/158odrczKbI?t=326). ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/12 "2015-05-03T16:46:36Z")
> [@Plumpudding](#): > > Sam Harris didn’t seem interested in having a debate at all. I’m not quite sure what he intended with this, but to me he came of as less interested in an honest debate than, Chomsky, who explicitly stated he’s not interested in having a debate with Harris. Atleast Chomsky argued and defended his views, right or wrong, rude or polite. > > Also, I have to add that I found Harris’ “thought experiment” cringe worthy, and Chomsky had every right to call it embarrasing. Well, they both make a living as authors and lecturers so it makes sense that Harris would want to debate him. Chomskys views eventually won me over but man is he a world class jerk. ---
**Author:** ![PlaceboTarget](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/placebotarget/32/1073_2.png) [@PlaceboTarget](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PlaceboTarget)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/13 "2015-05-03T16:50:26Z")
Some can enjoy a precious gift in spite of its uninviting wrap. ---
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/14 "2015-05-03T16:52:23Z")
Yeah, I’m not Chomsky’s biggest fan, to be honest. I can agree with him on some things, but he seems to have a tendency to exaggerate for effect and jump to conclusions. The Hitler argument reinforce those impressions, and could have been presented in a much better way. Him being a dick however, I have no problem with at all. ---
**Author:** ![Nametag](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nametag/32/406_2.png) [@Nametag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nametag)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/15 "2015-05-03T17:43:50Z")
Chomsky chooses his words carefully, and says precisely what he means. However, while that often means that he doesn’t mean what he doesn’t say, it can’t be taken for granted that his omission means anything in particular. It does seem that Chomsky is less impressed than Harris is by intent versus consequences, but Harris’s initial writings and his responses to Chomsky indicate that he’s assuming far too much - that because Chomsky didn’t say straight out that “9/11 and the bombing of the Al Shifa plant aren’t morally equivalent,” that he thought they were, or at least hadn’t thought about it. Both are false, but Harris can’t seem to wrap his head around Chomsky’s actual position. Harris also can’t seem to grasp why Chomsky says that President Clinton can’t possibly have determined that Al Shifa was a chemical weapons plant in the short interval between the embassy bombings and the Al Shifa bombing. He says it’s possible that Clinton had already come to that conclusion, and doesn’t see that this doesn’t affect Chomsky’s position that the Al Shifa bombing was in retaliation for the embassy bombings (that it was just a coincidence is not impossible, but it does beggar the imagination). I don’t know whether Chomsky deliberately plays this shell game with his readers, or merely hasn’t the patience to be explicit about things that don’t interest him or support his arguments, but Harris seems clearly unprepared to parse Chomsky’s writing in this respect, and is not a good choice to address Chomsky at all, much less debate him. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/16 "2015-05-03T18:01:00Z")
> [@Nametag](#): > > Harris also can’t seem to grasp why Chomsky says that President Clinton can’t possibly have determined that Al Shifa was a chemical weapons plant in the short interval between the embassy bombings and the Al Shifa bombing. He says it’s possible that Clinton had already come to that conclusion, and doesn’t see that this doesn’t affect Chomsky’s position that the Al Shifa bombing was in retaliation for the embassy bombings (that it was just a coincidence is not impossible, but it does beggar the imagination). yeah, it seems clear it was in retaliation and done without regard for the consequences ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/17 "2015-05-03T21:30:14Z")
What a joke. On the one hand, we have the modern-day reincarnation (in his mind probably literally so) of Baron Von Ungern-Sternberg, a dilettente devotee of Oriental mysticism whose also picked up the less savoury side of Oriental cruelty along the way. Hence this odd product of a man who will proclaim the superiority of secular humanistic morality whilst advocating the torture of those icky monotheists and probably will happily order the nuking of Mecca before going off to practice Tantric Meditation in some pathetic imitation of a Class A Japanese War Criminal who at least made a decent soldier. On the other hand we have the cunning linguist who somehow decided that advocating certain questionable views in his field of expertise made him an expert in everything including politics. Said views appear to consist of posing him as a brilliant iconoclast when in reality he is literally the dean of American academia and which really can be summed up into: American can do no right. Where the Hell is Reinhold Niebuhr when you need him? ---
**Author:** ![Maserschmidt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/maserschmidt/32/18829_2.png) [@Maserschmidt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maserschmidt)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/18 "2015-05-03T22:00:56Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > Harris is an Atheist author/lecturer Oh, that guy. I saw him on Bill Maher, he seemed kind of shallow. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2015, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/19 "2015-05-03T22:33:27Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > What a joke. > > On the one hand, we have the modern-day reincarnation (in his mind probably literally so) of Baron Von Ungern-Sternberg, a dilettente devotee of Oriental mysticism whose also picked up the less savoury side of Oriental cruelty along the way. Hence this odd product of a man who will proclaim the superiority of secular humanistic morality whilst advocating the torture of those icky monotheists and probably will happily order the nuking of Mecca before going off to practice Tantric Meditation in some pathetic imitation of a Class A Japanese War Criminal who at least made a decent soldier. > > On the other hand we have the cunning linguist who somehow decided that advocating certain questionable views in his field of expertise made him an expert in everything including politics. Said views appear to consist of posing him as a brilliant iconoclast when in reality he is literally the dean of American academia and which really can be summed up into: American can do no right. > > Where the Hell is Reinhold Niebuhr when you need him? > [@Maserschmidt](#): > > Oh, that guy. I saw him on Bill Maher, he seemed kind of shallow. I actually like them both a lot but I know they are not for everyone. I did enjoy reading your description Quin Shi ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144/20 "2015-05-04T06:06:27Z")
I kind of got the impression that Harris is used to being King of whatever debates he initiates and Chomsky kept handing him his ass for wanting to make professed good intentions triumph over semi-genocidal real politick consequences of state actions. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noam-chomsky-and-sam-harris/719144.md?page=2)