======================================================================
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
======================================================================


In which she makes an observation about Althusser and what she calls 
facts and which I called data in my reply to "Rethinking Imperialism" 
(http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2010/06/09/critiquing-a-critique-of-lenin/)--but
 
it amounts to the same thing:



Of course, some contemporary French essayists do criticize the United 
States from time to time. “Le Monde des livres” listed some of these – 
Pierre Bourdieu, Alain Badiou, Slavoj Zizek, Antonio Negri, et alia – as 
proof that the French have such great intellectuals that they have no 
need to hear what Chomsky has to say.

Even though they are of course very different from each other, certain 
differences between contemporary French philosophers on the one hand and 
Chomsky on the other deserve mention.

First and foremost is the question of facts. Chomsky’s criticism is 
laden with facts, a substance that seems to elicit ennui among 
contemporary French thinkers. No doubt the importance of the essay in 
the French educational system has bred a world of “philosophers” whose 
skill at manipulating fact-free ideas was the guarantee of a 
distinguished career. Louis Althusser confessed as much in his 
autobiography, admitting that he not only knew few facts but that he 
knew few works of philosophy – but he had learned how to synthesize. 
This raises the question of the social usefulness of such philosophy. If 
the social object is to entertain, then the French school reaches its 
goal – mystification is often far more entertaining than straightforward 
descriptions of reality. On the other hand, if the object is to help 
readers reach their own understanding of reality, especially political 
reality, then their first need is to be provided with the basic relevant 
facts, which most people do not have time to ascertain through their own 
research. Thus Chomsky is useful to citizens by providing them with the 
raw material to develop their own ideas in a way that the purveyors of 
ready-made but flimsily supported ideas are not.

full: 
http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2010/06/09/critiquing-a-critique-of-lenin/


________________________________________________
Send list submissions to: [email protected]
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to