Abstract

One of the constants in Noam Chomsky’s philosophical, linguistic and ethical positions is the existence of what he calls “human nature”. Following Marx, Darwin and last century’s revolutions in the social sciences, human nature has been one of the most contested conceptual holdovers from modern European philosophy. Chomsky’s discoveries and models on syntax and language make up one of the frameworks to most critically offset the traditional moral dimension of human nature. Contrary to most traditions prior to his work, language can no longer be restricted to either mind, soul or spirit. Language, as Chomsky has continually upheld and sharply refined, is a physical and biological process. But how his notion of human nature derives from this process is complex, as he seems to disregard philosophy’s classic analytic delineation between the descriptive causal realm of human nature and the normative axiological extensions of the same concept. In this paper, we seek to examine the philosophical and ontological implications of Chomsky’s claim that human nature derives from the innate dimension of the language faculty. Not only does Chomsky maintain the category of human nature, he also indexes it to the question of freedom. We thereby argue for the coherence of his proposal and show how it operates to weld the perspective of a modal theory of biologically-rooted creativity to innate conditions specific to his theory of language generation. However, we question whether its restriction to humans alone is sustainable from a scientific perspective by putting forth the claim that Chomsky’s science is in fact a radical ontology of social subjectivation.

Highlights

  • Ever since his noted televised debate with French philosopher Michel Foucault, Noam Chomsky’s theory of human nature has been one of the most contested aspects of his general philosophical project

  • Despite how central the notion of freedom continues to be in relation to his general theory of human nature, Chomsky has refused to make the additional step to link his scientific model to political orientation or the engagement in regard to which he has set an admirable international example

  • Even though we do not wish to question why Chomsky may have preferred an anarchist theory of free association between workers to a critique of political economy that recognizes the strength of Marx’s analysis in Capital as well as his accomplishments in leading the First International, our defense of Chomsky’s concept of human nature is not made easier by his regular disparaging of most philosophical theories on language and science

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Ever since his noted televised debate with French philosopher Michel Foucault, Noam Chomsky’s theory of human nature has been one of the most contested aspects of his general philosophical project. Where Chomsky’s argument breaches the criteria of contemporary philosophy of science is when he seeks to set human nature within the biological process specific to the language faculty.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call