- Nov 2016
I asked a harmless question, but you're reacting rather irritably. Why that? You don't even give a single argument why Chomsky - whether only ´arguably´ or otherwise - should be the greatest living philosopher. So you write "arguably" but don´t provide any solid argument. Instead, you're just pointing out that he's supposed to be one of the highest ranked philosophers of the last 50 years, which you claim is "common knowledge". You couldn't think of more arguments? And why do you conclude from his belonging to that group that exactly he - and no one else - is the "arguably" most important philosopher of our day? Why do you choose exactly him? There are others (Habermas, Foucault, Derrida, Wilber, Popper etc.) who have or had much more influence in the philosophical scene and are much more cited and discussed than Chomsky, who is mainly known as a linguist (Habermas and Wilber are still alive and are, in my opinion, much more important as philosophers than Chomsky, what can be claimed in good conscience even without an "arguably").You forgot the word "arguably" from my post. Be careful with that because it's against the rules iirc. Would be easier if you'd name what philosophers (among the ones still alive) you rank above him. I have to say though, Chomsky being among the most highly rated philosophers of the last 50 years is common knowledge (unless you argue he shouldn't be classified as such to begin with). You'd get pretty subjective to claim otherwise, and the thread would derail into a left vs right debate, so no thanks.