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.
1、民主社会的理想是好人的理想还是所有人的理想?2、现实在理论面前是狭隘的,还是理论在现实面前是狭隘的?3、哲学理想更漫无边际,还是政治理想更漫无边际?4、战争是人性的悲剧,却是历史的重要环节。5、看来中国的大同社会还太不为欧洲人所了解。最美好,也最接近现实的最...
评分莫尤 【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滔不绝,时而蹦出些想象...
评分读这个对话录,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...
评分看《福柯的生死爱欲》又想起这书,谈到的好像就是这场世纪辩论。摘两段乔对福柯的评价,原书见第六章,p266&p268: 一边读一边发笑。我也不确定我读懂福柯多少,大概很少很少,但他真是个对我意义重大的哲学家(可能因为我们同一天生日,他就在我心里比较特别,哈哈);在...
评分莫尤 【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滔不绝,时而蹦出些想象...
乔姆斯基在福柯面前仿佛共产主义真善美小天使…第二部分权力中心化和去中心化对我有所启发。
评分20世纪前半叶结构语言学成为显学 乔姆斯基以其为靶子 而当结构主义扩散后 福柯以之为武器批判科技史中的主观导向。所以二人都是对的 人类现象就是充满线索而又无法预测
评分Plato和Aristotle永远在辩论:上一个时代他们的化名是Chomsky和Foucault,在更久远的过去他们曾自称Bernard Shaw和G.K.Chesterton。而我总是倾向于支持后者。
评分这两个人,相当的萌啊。还有Said,你是不是Foucault的Fan啊~~= =||||
评分人的本质是虐恋和掠念,操
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 qciss.net All Rights Reserved. 小哈图书下载中心 版权所有