Chomsk was: Endless debates (was Burning Fat for Energy

[Guest guest]

> Ultimately, we came to a stalemate, from the best of my memory,

because we

> came to a disagreement over whether it is more important or not to

use multiple

> sources when one or more source is ideological in nature. I hope

I'm not

> misrepresenting your view here, but if I am, it's not deliberate,

it's because it

> was a while ago. From memory, I thought that it is always best to

use

> multiple sources on something, but that it is moreso when a source

is ideological, or

> when the person holds an ideology that relates to that issue. I

don't recall

> whether or not you believed that it is important to use multiple

sources (I

> think you did), but you didn't believe that the ideology of a

source makes a

> difference.

This is the last place I ever thought I'd see a reference to Chomsky.

I'm always amazed

what I find on this group.

What a coincidence too-I just got " Manufacturing Consent " from

Netflix, but have only

seen around 30 minutes of it (I have a toddler who long ago

discovered the on/off switch

so movie watching is haphazard at best).

I agree, it would be best to get multiple sources for political

information, but that's not

easy in the U.S (and Chomsky talks about why it's not in the movie).

You really have to

search for alternative points of view, especially progressive ones; I

don't think Fox will be

airing a segment on Chomsky anytime soon, or my local news station

for that matter.

Probably because he is very intellectual, and that rubs a lot

Americans the wrong way (all

those polysyllabic words, you know). Present company excluded of

course.

Naomi