logoalt Hacker News

PaulHoule • today at 5:43 PM • 1 reply • view on HN

To the cynic, Chomskyism is exactly what Thomas Kuhn warned you about "normal science".

That is, you can apply for grants and write papers in the transformational grammar paradigm endlessly. You can pose and answer questions that make sense within in the system.

Chomskyism was disappointing in two respects: (1) was that it was an inadequate basis for machine understanding of text, (2) was that structuralists were hoping everything in culture could be understood in terms of "... having the structure of language" but syntactic structures weren't all adequate for that task.

(1) and (2) both pointed to Chomskyism being hermetic and not something really useful or inspiring to other fields and maybe just a little less "true".


Replies

huijzer • today at 6:00 PM

> You can pose and answer questions that make sense within in the system.

Yes this is one of my critiques of the academic system (I have finished a PhD and will hopefully never work at a university ever again). Many papers in the introduction start with explaining how the study builds on plenty of previous research, but that alone doesn’t prove that something is a good direction to investigate. If academics were completely honest, many papers would write “We researched topic X because we got funding for it. But since we actually don’t care about X, we just wrote a proposal about our favorite niche topic that only one of the co-authors cares about, namely topic Y, and wrote it such that it sounds like X. Next we show that Y is actually very cool in the hope to convince others that it is cool plus to convince others of the conclusion that our most senior professor already found during the PhD which was 30 years ago. Apart from the professor, we don’t believe in the main argument of the paper but since he got the grant we’ll just go with it in the hope to one day be able to push our own ideas forward”.