Sunday, February 7, 2021

Why is the "left" still stuck on Zizek vs Chomsky? Male psychophysiology - that's why!!

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne3uZSQmXzc&ab_channel=ZeroBooks

 Zizek claims that he considers quantum mechanics to be a new norm of modern science engaging with the "real" vis a vis common sense yet Zizek himself simply relies on the "shut up and calculate" model of QM - he hasn't really studied QM in detail. Noam Chomsky in contrast has been collaborating a bit with Nobel physicist Sir Roger Penrose's model of consciousness with Dr. Stuart Hameroff. This model relies on noncommutative phase logic. 

I asked Chomsky about this via music theory because Chomsky now considers music as a possible origin of human thinking and language. This music model is from Hameroff and Penrose as noncommutative phase. 

Zizek has no idea what this means. I sent Zizek my 1996 monograph that critiqued him. I spent two years studying Zizek and another two years studying Chomsky. Zizek sent me a postcard stating, "after a quick glance it looks very interesting - I will read it and get back to you." He never got back to me except that his 1997 book, "Plague of Fantasies" was his direct reply to the specific critiques I had made of Zizek - only he presented them as a strawman argument. 

So for example Zizek's reference to Plato's Chora or to the Shofar of the Jews - again if Zizek really studied noncommutative phase music logic then he would realize that he has been wrong. So I recommend for example Field Medal math professor Alain Connes lecture on music - just look it up on youtube. I don't post youtube links anymore as they easily get censored. haha.  

By the way I have also corresponded with Chomsky and I quoted and referenced Chomsky for my own activism to get the Workers Rights Consortium established at the U of MN. I also predicted the US would invade Iraq again and it was genocidal - in 1998 - and this completely relied on Chomsky's analysis. As Chomsky replied to me (and yes I saved this and have reposted this) - people routinely read his interview books but rarely read his lengthier more intense or as it was stated, "turgid" books.  

So yeah I enjoyed studying both Zizek and Chomsky but I consider both to be lacking. Yet in the end I would have to choose Chomsky over Zizek. Oh yeah Chomsky told me he doesn't have "time" to investigate noncommutative music as the origin of human thinking - and that makes sense. He has focused on concrete activism over theory about social philosophy, etc.  

Also I would say that anthropology professor Chris Knight's critique of Chomsky is also lacking. Why? Because despite the excellent research Chris Knight has done they still need to take our original human culture more seriously! I have compiled a list of books on the San Bushmen - but just go to Brad Keeney's youtube channel for interviews with the spiritual healers of our original human culture. 

Independent thinkers should not limit their analysis just to Western science as if because it has not been "proven" yet therefore it does not exist. The "left" seems to want some kind of Daddy figure whether it's Zizek or Chomsky. My high school buddy told me to read both of them - and I'm glad I did - but it is also possible to go beyond as well. thanks. For example Chomsky says we have probably a couple decades to fix the ecological crisis and we have the technology to do so. But if you really study the science of the ecological crisis - then the evidence says otherwise.

 And here I recommend the blog "arctic news blogspot" or the arctic sea ice forum. We're looking at an "ice free" scenario by 2026 and that will add another 1 trillion ton equivalent and the methane is spiking already out of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf. Jim Massa, an oceanography out of Alaska - has a science youtube channel - and he does a great job. But he admits he has not studied Aerosol Masking - which again has prevented warming. So that means if we reduce sulfur pollution from coal by 80% that will warm the planet by another 2 degree Celsius. So the ecological crisis is much worse than either Chomsky nor Zizek are willing to consider.

No comments:

Post a Comment