: : Did Chomsky say "Skinner advocates . . .gas ovens . . .blah, blah, blah"? No, he didn't. He said "there's nothing in Skinner's approach that's incompatible with a police state . . ."
: What a slithering retreat.
: Chomsky only mentioned Nazis and concentration camps and gas ovens while discussing Skinner and behaviorism throughout his 'review.' OF COURSE that doesn't MEAN Chomsky was comparing Skinner to the above metaphors, it was simply a COINCIDENCE.
: Take responsibility for your statements or shut up.
So, Mad Dog, after two posts in which I showed that the 43 year old debate between debate Skinner and Chomsky is long over and CHOMSKY WON, you give me this? I'm disappointed in you, Mad Dog. Furthermore, the second of my responses was pretty much conciliatory, but you nevertheless took one of my topic sentences out, call it a 'slithering retreat', then disengenuously suggested that I suggested Chomsky's Nazi allusion was a coincidence.
Finally you didn't even deal with my major point: Chomsky showed that Skinner's approach can't adequately deal with acquisition of a first language.
Your response only leaves me with my mouth agape in wonder, Mad Dog. Does your rigid, bunker-mentality have no shame? I hope everyone on this board will read this thread over and over and will forever look at your posts with the understanding that you're little more than a crude (yet articulate) ideologue. It's a good thing for us all that you'll never amount to anything more than a legend in your own mind.
Good luck, Mad Dog.
A Yanked Hank
P.S. And to think, I actually began this discussion trying to have a civil debate with you in which we would be exchanging ideas and insights. Sheesh!
"Now and then there's a fool such as I."