In 1971, International Philosophers Project by Dutch initiatives provided a series of one-on-one debate of the leading thinkers at that time and perhaps, still for now, to discuss the Human Nature. The third series of the debate between Michel Foucoult against Noam Chomsky is justifiably the most famous of all.


Chomsky believed that 'justice' and 'truth' have meaning and value independent of power while Foucoult believed that both are ultimately the manifestations of power. Chomsky argues that humans, indeed, do have a deeper essence, one that is good, and perhaps even just. This is, he maintains, proven by the existence of generalized creativity, the everyday innovations and improvisations exhibited within decision-making processes that generate knowledge. Creativity results in innovation, and thus, the basis for sociopolitical transformation lies rooted within human nature itself. Language and the forms of application it takes are crucial here, both for Chomsky as linguist, and for Foucault as intellectual historian.


As a counterargument, Foucault draws on his “archaeological method,” best articulated in his book The Order of Things, to assert that any idea of a human nature falls prey to the episteme of a given civilizational moment. That is, the structures of language, order, and imagination which allow for ideas to emerge and to translate themselves into sensible practices of knowledge. As our civilization, since the sixteenth century, has been primarily a capitalist one, any discussion on human “nature” must self-reflect on the language of capital that frames its view of the world, even of possible worlds.