EpsteinProject.org

House Oversight — Estate records

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_028936

Pages
3
Text
Searchable

Text as released

Machine-read from the scan. Names, dates and numbers can be misread — check anything you rely on against the original page.

From: Lawrence Krauss 
Sent: 9/10/2015 8:09:42 PM 
To: jeffrey E. [jeeyacation@gmail.com] 
Subject: Fwd: an article you may both hate. or like. 
Attachments: DA866543-7401-4A5A-8E50-FD32E33A5OEC.png; DA866543-7401-4A5A-8E50-FD32E33A5OEC.png 
Importance: High 
Lawrence M. Krauss 
Director, The Origins Project at ASU 
Foundation Professor 
School of Earth & Space Exploration and Physics Department 
Arizona State University, P.O. Box 871404, Tempe, AZ 85287-1404 
Research Office: Assistant 
Origins Office 
origins.asu.edu I twitter.comilkraussl I krauss.faculty.asu.edu 
Sent from my iPhone 
Begin forwarded message: 
From: "Noam Chomsky" 
Date: September 10, 2015 at 12:01:39 PM MST 
To: Lawrence Krauss < 
Subject: RE: an article you may both hate. or like. 
Then we're in complete agreement. 
Noam 
From: Lawrence Krauss [mailto:  
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 2:46 PM 
To: Noam Chomsky ____________________ 
Subject: Re: an article you may both hate. or like. 
I couldn't agree more. Re ridicule. I never suggest ridiculing people. However by pointing out the inconsistency, 
or contravening evidence associated with various ideas, including for example American exceptionalism, then 
we are essentially subjecting ideas to ridicule. That is what I meant. 
Lawrence M. Krauss 
Director, The Origins Project at ASU 
Foundation Professor 
School of Earth & Space Exploration and Physics Department 
Arizona State Universit, P.O. Box 871404, Tempe, AZ 85287-1404 
Research Office: Assistant 
HOUSE OVERSIGHT 028936 
Origins Office 
origins.asu.edu I twitter.comilkrausst I krauss.faculty.asu.edu 
Sent from my iPhone 
On Sep 10, 2015, at 10:52 AM, Noam Chomsky < > wrote: 
Thanks for sending. A wide area of agreement, but not total. 
On confronting dogma, I of course agree — though in my opinion the secular religions — nationalist fanaticism, etc. — are 
much more dangerous. And if some find rational discussion offensive — as, for example, mainstream academics find 
dismantling myths 

[…]

Open in the archive