Noam Chomsky

[Galen]

Colorless green ideas dream furiously.

[mu4]

I favor LSE because of some really stereotypical Delta values. His free public lectures can easily be framed within the context of a career of service to his community.

He was very good friends with the late activist Howard Zinn, who is definitely ego and probably Delta NF.

I think he's EII. EII's are very hard working I've found, they can to over do stuff and overwork and be extremely responsible.

[Creepy-male]

I think he's EII. EII's are very hard working I've found, they can to over do stuff and overwork and be extremely responsible.

hkkmr has three gears:

• 1) Type someone as ILE
• 2) Type someone as EII
• 3) KICK REASON TO THE CURB AND DO THE IMPOSSIBLE!!!!

[silverchris9]

Te ego seems likely. I don't like him. I vote for LIE over LSE however.

[mfckr]

I still think LII. IJ>EJ temperament should be obvious. He is also loathsome.

[crazedrat]

why is he loathsome?

[mu4]

hkkmr has three gears:

• 1) Type someone as ILE
• 2) Type someone as EII
• 3) KICK REASON TO THE CURB AND DO THE IMPOSSIBLE!!!!

Um, what? I typed MIA as SLE earlier.

I type Glam as IEI, Starfall as IEI, Haylee Williams as SLI, Sarinana as EIE.

Please, don't say something that's not true.

Oh yea, Brian, you're not SEI or a 9, now shut the fuck up, I don't want to deal with you.

[MatthewZ]

LII.

[jughead]

I find him a shitty speaker, hard to follow.
In that interview

[717495]

INTj seems reasonable.

[Shagbag The Wizard]

I find him a shitty speaker, hard to follow.
In that interview

Lol, he himself has admitted that he is a shitty and boring speaker. Gotta love his honesty.

I read somewhere that he is officially the most quoted scholar of the century or something to that effect.

[Linas]

Te ego seems likely. I don't like him. I vote for LIE over LSE however.

I love him, thought about ILI. But he seems to be a little bit too Alphabetish, donno...

[Gilly]

LII to the max.

[silke]

updated: LII sp/so 1w2

[Ave]

LII or maybe EII.

I've been thinking about his type lately and while EII always seemed a good choice, LII could work.

[The Reality Denialist]

LII

[Ave]

Yeah, I think LII is right, esp.from VI.

Has a similar gaze to Stephen Hawking (rip): dreamy, infantile, merry.

[MrsTortilla]

I would have immediately said LII but then the picture of him when he was young makes me think Gamma. I just don't know!

[khcs]

Noam Chomsky - INTP - Balzac

[on a peaceful hiatus]

hmm I'm slowly leaning more towards EII. he makes a lot of ethical evaluations here, which I can't see myself doing as an LII. I might see it in a similar way, but it would be difficult for me to formulate it.

https://youtu.be/5BXtgq0Nhsc

@Subteigh

thanks for pointing that out @mu4

[on a peaceful hiatus]

another example of Fi

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_4Rmb2wvJ4

[FreelancePoliceman]

@Alive, I don't think those videos prove much. Chomsky is making ethical judgements, yes, but any type can do that. Jungian feeling or 'ethics' isn't just the ability to make these sorts of abstract judgements but a specific inward disposition and way of seeing and relating with the world. Chomsky doesn't have that. He's emotionally restrained at all times, always formally polite, his facial expressions and gestures are always measured. You don't ever really get a sense he ever thinks much about other people's feelings or anything which isn't particularly relevant or interesting to him. He also has a tendency to make assertions and present them as if they're self-evident, without any evident care to how they'll be received, which is especially obvious when he debates. This is not very typical of an EII, but does fit an LII.

But I think the specific way Chomsky displays flashes of 'feeling' is also indicative of an LII typing. Here is Stratiyevskaya's description of the type; notice that she presents this 'ethical' sense -- a need for "fairness" -- as central to the type. Strat isn't the god of socionics, but this idea isn't unique to her. The popular image of Robespierre is associated with the type -- a dry uncompromising willingness to make whatever sacrifices necessary to accomplish this idea of 'equality'. Chomsky is the same way. The ethical judgements he makes are black-and-white; it's good against evil, and he's clearly established which sides are good and which are evil. He doesn't present the matter as up for debate; his mindset is that he makes his case reasonably, the facts aren't wrong, so he's right, plain and simple. It's a judgement based in reason, and if an emotional appeal could be made he'd discount it without thinking. I don't see any good reason to type him as F.

[SGF]

the least likable LII thus far.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

LII are really good speakers if they want to because they have suggestive Fe which helps them feel the emotional atmosphere and how other people react to their words. chomsky on the other hand has a very monotonous and calm way of speaking, which is a characteristic of EII, they are not good speakers. I suspect chomsky to be a normalising subtype with highly developed Ti, which makes him come off as LII

[Chthonic Daydream]

the least likable LII thus far.

Agree. Get this nuisance out of the world of modern 'philosophical thought'. I despised every single paragraph of his that we were forced to look at in my course. Luckily, there were only a few loose references here and there. That's more attention than he deserves.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

Agree. Get this nuisance out of the world of modern 'philosophical thought'. I despised every single paragraph of his that we were forced to look at in my course. Luckily, there were only a few loose references here and there. That's more attention than he deserves.

what do you dislike about him?

[Chthonic Daydream]

what do you dislike about him?

As time went on after his departure further and further away from linguistics, he became a poster boy for the radical left. And that is a jar of fecal matter that I would rather not open here, since we all know about it. His lectures are a symbiote of the propaganda model -- there is nothing in me that makes me seem above propaganda, or worthy of criticizing it. But when propaganda makes no attempt to make itself covert, and instead jumps at your throat like that, then I have all the right in the world to openly disagree with it, do I not?

But if my memory serves me right, he recently signed an open letter that opposes the growing tumor of "cancel culture" in support of free speech. He is not yet redeemed in my eyes for this, but he gets some good boy points for doing the right thing here. Academics usually go through a dozen deaths and reincarnations when it comes to their views, before their death. Here's to hoping this marks a blissful transition for him.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

As time went on after his departure further and further away from linguistics, he became a poster boy for the radical left. And that is a jar of fecal matter that I would rather not open here, since we all know about it. His lectures are a symbiote of the propaganda model -- there is nothing in me that makes me seem above propaganda, or worthy of criticizing it. But when propaganda makes no attempt to make itself covert, and instead jumps at your throat like that, then I have all the right in the world to openly disagree with it, do I not?

But if my memory serves me right, he recently signed an open letter that opposes the growing tumor of "cancel culture" in support of free speech. He is not yet redeemed in my eyes for this, but he gets some good boy points for doing the right thing here. Academics usually go through a dozen deaths and reincarnations when it comes to their views, before their death. Here's to hoping this marks a blissful transition for him.

do you think that your distaste for him and his ideas could come from the fact that he might be a type from your opposing quadra?

[Metamorph]

Why am I the only one who voted ILE? He is more known for his speaking and public appearances than for his writing or ideas. He has not written new linguistics books or articles in decades and when I sent him materials relating to linguistics asking about his opinions he seemed mostly but not entirely uninterested, talking as if he will not have enough time left in his life to read about linguistics, the field his actual professorship is in, and must fully dedicate himself to public speaking and news article writing about politics and current events.

Of course, even having polls on all these threads, at least anonymous polls, is a travesty, as if truth were decided by popular consensus.

[Nephilthoth]

LII

[Metamorph]

LII

I talk to Noam Chomsky off and on and I don't think he's very Ti no matter how much of an old curmudgeon he seems like. He's much more focused on causing political change than on theorizing. Fi or Ne in my opinion, or even Fe if you're in the Gulenko camp and EIE is Mentor rather than Actor.

I don't blame Chomsky. Ideas are nice and all but worthless without acting upon them.

[Metamorph]

Why does everyone think Noam Chomsky is 1D Se when his whole thing is he lived on a commune in Palestine in his youth and now he wants the Zionist occupiers out, an accusation that often makes people think he is Antisemitic or a neo-Nazi despite the fact he's literally Jewish?

We could also just ask him what he types as, he's alive and he responds to emails, however, he doesn't even have time to read linguistics books because he's too occupied with politics, perhaps understandably, so he almost certainly would ignore it.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

INFx, leaning more and more towards IEI now, mainly bc of his work on linguistics and that I associate an interest in languages with Ni+

[Metamorph]

INFx, leaning more and more towards IEI now, mainly bc of his work on linguistics and that I associate an interest in languages with Ni+

...Ah yes, the 1D Se of someone who literally lived on a commune in British Palestine and is more known for giving political talks than for any of his theoretical ideas in linguistics, because he explicitly thinks changing the world matters more than his professorship.

Noam Chomsky may not be an Arnold Schwarzenegger macho man but he's no wallflower, either.

[FreelancePoliceman]

Why does everyone think Noam Chomsky is 1D Se when his whole thing is he lived on a commune in Palestine in his youth and now he wants the Zionist occupiers out, an accusation that often makes people think he is Antisemitic or a neo-Nazi despite the fact he's literally Jewish?

We could also just ask him what he types as, he's alive and he responds to emails, however, he doesn't even have time to read linguistics books because he's too occupied with politics, perhaps understandably, so he almost certainly would ignore it.

What does any of that have to do with Se?

[Metamorph]

What does any of that have to do with Se?

Se = politics and wanting to influence people, also physical activities (living on a commune in Palestine, Noam Chomsky's outdoor hobbies)

So I have to see him as at least a 2D Se type like ILE, EIE, or IEE, especially since he doesn't even really do linguistics anymore and hasn't in ages (decades,) he mostly does politics and public speaking. If we really went full Jungian rather than socionics with its quadra values, duality, cognitive styles, and action styles, I would absolutely consider him to be either an Ne or Se type.

[FreelancePoliceman]

Se = politics and wanting to influence people, also physical activities (living on a commune in Palestine, Noam Chomsky's outdoor hobbies)

So I have to see him as at least a 2D Se type like ILE, EIE, or IEE, especially since he doesn't even really do linguistics anymore and hasn't in ages (decades,) he mostly does politics and public speaking. If we really went full Jungian rather than socionics with its quadra values, duality, cognitive styles, and action styles, I would absolutely consider him to be either an Ne or Se type.

I don't think wanting to influence people/having political opinions = Se. I'm pretty sure my ability with Se is 1D and I'm pretty outspoken.

[Metamorph]

I don't think wanting to influence people/having political opinions = Se. I'm pretty sure my ability with Se is 1D and I'm pretty outspoken.

That's how Jung describes it so I tend to just view Se as being more about force, power, dominance, and the like. And if Se were physical ability people should stop typing Arnold Schwarzenegger and other famous bodybuilders and athletes as anything other than Se. Is Se just the body or is it wanting to be dominant? People cannot decide. I decided in favor of dominance so I don't tend to want to view anyone dominating as IEI or EII (ILI and LII at least have logic to kind of make up for it.)

Additionally, even if Se is just physical things, Chomsky's hobbies are hiking and boating, not watching every single movie like Osama bin Laden in his bunker.

[xerx]

Social activism is cool.

[Poptart]

Social activism is cool.

According to…?