"As for the "deconstruction" that is carried out (also mentioned in the debate), I can't comment, because most of it seems to me gibberish. But if this is just another sign of my incapacity to recognize profundities, the course to follow is clear: just restate the results to me in plain words that I can understand, and show why they are different from, or better than, what others had been doing long before and and have continued to do since without three-syllable words, incoherent sentences, inflated rhetoric that (to me, at least) is largely meaningless, etc. That will cure my deficiencies --- of course, if they are curable; maybe they aren't, a possibility to which I'll return. "
This is the level of the writing. He don't understand deconstruction so he don't like it. That is what is wrong with most critique of postmodernism.
Further more it's not just french philosophers. Thomas Kuhn, Lakatos and Feyrabend are not exactly french.
All he do is showing how ignorant he is on what he speaks. But that do expalain the level of his other writing.
I think you need to understand the context of Chomsky's remarks. He is responding to people who criticize him because he doesn't work within a "theoretical" framework, and his activism isn't properly informed by postmodern understanding.
I have heard people criticize universal grammar as being, essentially, a Colonialist theory, which attempts to assimilate languages into a Eurocentric framework. That is the sort of BS he is replying to. Chomsky is not saying, "postmodernists are stupid and should stop doing philosophy," rather, he is saying, "you want me to do things in a certain way, so explain why."
"I have heard people criticize universal grammar as being, essentially, a Colonialist theory, which attempts to assimilate languages into a Eurocentric framework."
What is the BS part then formulation or the theory?
This is the level of the writing. He don't understand deconstruction so he don't like it. That is what is wrong with most critique of postmodernism.
Further more it's not just french philosophers. Thomas Kuhn, Lakatos and Feyrabend are not exactly french.
All he do is showing how ignorant he is on what he speaks. But that do expalain the level of his other writing.