The Reception of the Sokal Affair in France—”Pomo” Hunting or Intellectual Mccarthyism?: A Propos of Impostures Intellectuelles by A. Sokal and J. Bricmont. Imposturas Intelectuais (Alan Sokal & Jean Bricmont). 2 likes. Book. Papers by Alan Sokal on the “Social Text Affair”; Sokal-Bricmont book . São Paulo, Jornal de Resenhas, 11 abril ); “Descomposturas intelectuais”, ” Imposturas e fantasias”, by Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont (Folha de.
|Published (Last):||11 November 2005|
|PDF File Size:||1.63 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||14.13 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The philosopher Thomas Laan has supported Sokal and Bricmont, describing their book as consisting largely of “extensive quotations of scientific gibberish from name-brand French intellectuals, together with eerily patient explanations of why it is gibberish,”  and agreeing that “there does seem to be something about the Parisian scene that imposturqs particularly hospitable to reckless verbosity.
The book has been criticized by post-modern philosophers and by scholars with some interest in continental philosophy. The Knowable and the Unknowable.
Bruce Fink offers a critique in his book Lacan to the Letterwhere he accuses Sokal and Bricmont of demanding that “serious writing” do nothing other than “convey clear meanings”. Retrieved 25 June This latter point has been disputed by Arkady Plotnitsky one of the authors mentioned by Sokal in his original hoax.
Cover of the first edition. Perhaps he is genuine when he speaks of non-scientific subjects? University of Michigan Press.
People have been bitterly divided. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. London Review of Books.
Alan Sokal Jean Bricmont. Two Millennia of Mathematics: Sokal and Bricmont highlight the rising tide of what they call cognitive relativismthe belief that there are no objective truths but only local beliefs.
According to some reports, the response within the humanities was “polarized. Noam Chomsky called the book “very important” and said that “a lot of the so-called ‘left’ criticism [of science] seems to be pure nonsense”.
Fashionable Nonsense – Wikipedia
The discussion became polarized between impassioned supporters and equally impassioned opponents of Sokal [ Their aim is “not imoosturas criticize the left, but to help defend it from a trendy segment of itself. Contemporary Cultural Theory 3rd ed. Limiting her considerations to physics, science hystorian Mara Beller  maintained that it was not entirely fair to blame contemporary postmodern philosophers for drawing nonsensical conclusions from quantum physics which they did dosince many such conclusions were drawn by some of the leading quantum physicists themselves, such as Bohr or Heisenberg when they ventured into philosophy.
Print Hardcover and Paperback. Postmodern Intellectuals’ Abuse of Science Cover of the first edition.
At Whom Are We Laughing? He takes Sokal and Bricmont to task for elevating a disagreement with Lacan’s choice of writing styles to an attack on his thought, which, in Fink’s assessment, they fail to understand.
Alan Sokal’s writings on science, philosophy and culture
Event occurs at 3: University of Minnesota Press. According to New York Review of Books editor Barbara Epsteinwho was delighted by Sokal’s hoax inteectuais, within the humanities the response to the book was bitterly divided, with some delighted and some enraged;  in some reading groupsreaction was polarized between impassioned supporters and equally impassioned opponents of Sokal. Archived from the original on May 12, Postmodernism Philosophy of science.
In Jacques Derrida ‘s response, “Sokal and Bricmont Aren’t Serious,” first intelectuaix in Le MondeDerrida writes that the Sokal hoax is rather “sad,” not only because Alan Sokal’s name is now linked primarily to a hoaxnot to sciencebut also because the chance to reflect seriously on this issue has been ruined for a broad public forum that deserves better. jntelectuais
Postmodern Intellectuals’ Abuse of Science French: From Archimedes to Gauss. Probably no one concerned with postmodernism has remained unaware of it.
One friend of mine told me that Sokal’s article came up in a meeting of a left reading group that he belongs to. This page was last edited on 27 Decemberat Retrieved 15 April Responses from the scientific community were more supportive.
Sokal and Bricmont define abuse of mathematics and physics as:. The book gives a chapter to each of the above-mentioned authors, “the tip of the iceberg” of a group of intellectual practices that can be described as “mystification, deliberately obscure language, confused thinking and the misuse of scientific concepts.